Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932126AbVLCSjO (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 13:39:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932127AbVLCSjO (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 13:39:14 -0500 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:36318 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932126AbVLCSjO (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 13:39:14 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:39:12 +0000 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" To: Adrian Bunk Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <20051203183912.GA8203@gallifrey> References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Chocolate: 70 percent or better cocoa solids preferably X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.11-1.14_FC3 (i686) X-Uptime: 18:29:52 up 92 days, 6:56, 67 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1629 Lines: 37 Hi Adrian, I would really appreciate such a move to a stable series. I've had some really bad luck with instability of 2.6.x - in particular with NFS. Would such a stable kernel keep up to date on basic drivers? I ask since I got into a messy situation on a series of production servers; they were really new Dell servers using standard Intel chipsets but needed SATA stuff that went in recently. Does 2.6.16 have the basic infrastructure for all the current hardware so that if you branch now you aren't going to have to do any really heavy backports to be able to run on 'current' hardware? I hit the situation where I have a 2.6.5 kernel I use on everything else and whose NFS works fine; and 2.6.11 or newer which supports the hardware - but whose NFS is giving me broken locking to some obscure systems. IMHO we've also got into a real mess where it is vendor kernels that have stability fixes in for many things (NFS in particular) - but the lkml doesn't want to know about vendor kernels, but at the same time they aren't up for stabilisation. Good luck with such a branch! Dave -- -----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code ------- / Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy \ \ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | MIPS,x86,ARM,SPARC,PPC & HPPA | In Hex / \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/